The Interstellar Case Files: by Jose Escamilla

Thanks for the web site URL, I received these coordinates from someone and never knew where they came from. Thanks for acknowledging the source.
Let's keep this link active and this person's findings! I hope these coordinates yield results. I have a line on an optical system that my friend
told me Lenard based his apparatus on. I am finding this link and will post it in the morning. I need to go back to bed. I am beat.

I got this from Gridkeeper's YOUTUBE account - sorry if it has already been posted.

"Message to everyone discussing the Gridkeeper/JLW situation on the forums, you are all off the mark. We are two different people and there is much
more to this than has been shown. Oh, and all the MIB stuff is real. See the video description of the MI5 video for an example."

(mike, i am not 'privy' to any details, i do not know if they are real, i have not seen a ufo for over 20 years, i seriously want to again, i have
been wearing rose colored glasses in respect to these images, i am financially retarded, and i want you to validify these suckers as being real...

..But fear that this repeated jargon about needing a 'special' part may be real!!
please!! prove my fears unfounded, kind sir!!! )

Originally posted by dodgygeeza
I got this from Gridkeeper's YOUTUBE account - sorry if it has already been posted.

"Message to everyone discussing the Gridkeeper/JLW situation on the forums, you are all off the mark. We are two different people and there is much
more to this than has been shown. Oh, and all the MIB stuff is real. See the video description of the MI5 video for an example."

Erm..The video of the helicopters might well be real ie real helicopters but it also contains portions of a UFO sighting that has nothing to do with
Leonard.

Originally posted by Donoso
Mike, if there are secret satellites (there are) in Earth orbit you
can bet an amateur astronomer somewhere around the globe has accidentally had it cross his field of view. He/she may not know what it was at the time
but this happens often.

Hi Donoso,

Here’s a photograph taken in Normandy by French astrophotographer Thierry Legault, published in the Daily Mail. He used a digital camera
attached to a £5,000 specially kitted-out telescope. Note the telescope was specially kitted out and cost £5,000!!

And what's more, the ISS seen in the pic below, is visible because of the yellow background of the sun. Could it have been spotted against the black
background of space?

Courtesy: Daily Mail.

Now how many of us can afford one at that astronomical price especially if one’s an amateur astronomer? Are these the possible reasons why the many
amateur astronomers have been unable to see these objects? (If they exist!).

In short, no. Amateur astronomer routinely drop the equivalent of 5000 pounds or more on a setup, but such expenses are not mandatory to be able to
see the space station's structure or spot other satellites. An 8" scope with computerized tracking like mine only costs about $1,500-2,000 US
dollars, and many amateur astronomers are retired engineers with cash to burn. There are some amateurs out there who spend their time trying to keep
track of classified military satellites, and they've successfully been keeping track of the orbits of every classified spy sat out there except for
one named "misty," a stealth spy sat that actively reflects its heat away from anyone who they suspect might be trying to watch it, thus remaining
virtually invisible. Whatever the reason is that amateurs have apparently been unable to see these objects, whether it's a hoax, an illusion, or
whatever, it's not for a lack of looking.

There are some amateurs out there who spend their time trying to keep track of classified military satellites, and they've successfully
been keeping track of the orbits of every classified spy sat out there except for one named "misty," a stealth spy sat that actively reflects its
heat away from anyone who they suspect might be trying to watch it, thus remaining virtually invisible. Whatever the reason is that amateurs have
apparently been unable to see these objects, whether it's a hoax, an illusion, or whatever, it's not for a lack of looking.

That's interesting, do you have any links to misty or maybe a source for the talk about it ?

It's not like either MISTY was invisible. Amateur satellite observers tracked the first and second MISTY satellites. I blogged about this a couple of
months ago after a couple of former SPACECOM officers mentioned a classified piece of the puzzle that would complicate plans to share satellite
tracking data to reduce the risk of collisions.

Excellent, I didn't think it would be so easy to find, that and a touch of laziness on my part, thanks eaglewingz have a star.

I quite liked this part:

One document is U.S. Patent 5,345,238, issued to Teledyne Industries of Los Angeles, California in 1994. It details a movable "satellite
signature suppression shield" -- a bit of clever technology that can suppress the laser, radar, visible, and infrared signatures of a satellite. The
invention makes spotting or tracking a satellite a tough-to-do proposition.

And

Another stealthy satellite was launched in 1999 atop a Titan 4 rocket launched from California. Once again the amateur satellite trackers followed
it, although after awhile they began to suspect that they were actually following a decoy and that the satellite itself was in a different
orbit.

I have a hunch that the real USA 144 is Misty 2, a "stealth satellite" in a 700- 800 km orbit, with the above object a light weight decoy. At
the very least, its rotation and high area-to-mass ratio (about 0.09 m^2/kg) suggest a debris-like object.

There are some amateurs out there who spend their time trying to keep track of classified military satellites, and they've successfully
been keeping track of the orbits of every classified spy sat out there except for one named "misty," a stealth spy sat that actively reflects its
heat away from anyone who they suspect might be trying to watch it, thus remaining virtually invisible. Whatever the reason is that amateurs have
apparently been unable to see these objects, whether it's a hoax, an illusion, or whatever, it's not for a lack of looking.

That's interesting, do you have any links to misty or maybe a source for the talk about it ?

This gives some background and context. It goes on to describe how misty probably actively deflect attempts to detect it using an inflatable
"shield" - some material that absorbs, visible, microwave, and radar parts of the spectrum to make it seem that there's nothing there but empty
space. Paint a spacecraft black and how are you going to see it against the black backdrop of space? That's basically all they had to do here. A
satellite can't be all black though; it'd quickly overheat, so instead they invented a movable shield to block viewing it from certain locations as
it orbits the earth.

Good question. Lenard in many phone conversations slipped information to me about the apparatus. At the time of that posting you referenced, he and I
were still under our contract, he was my partner, and in protecting his and my agreement, there was no reason for me divulge any trade secrets
pertaining to the device. Besides, I was producing the films, and promoting the project, Lenards job would be to get the apparatus built, scope and
cams allocated to his specs, and then I would assist in getting the device prototype made, tested and providing it could work on practically any type
of scope optics system, get it mass produced and marketed through astronomy stores, web sites worldwide, etc.

That was my plan. Then Lenard started this story about agents and all that, (see page one), and this is now where we are. At the impasse!

From my point of view in what Lenard said, the apparatus is so simple a third grader could build it. Right now I can't release this information,
because even though Lenard has breached our signed contract, I have to adhere to my contract with "him" and I cannot circumvent the agreement I made
with him.

Even though he has broken all trust and contractual agreements with me, I cannot break the agreement. That would deem this thread useless for in doing
so I would be just as dishonest as he has been.

I am giving Lenard and Gridkeeper a couple days to come here and let's see what develops.

Jose Escamilla

Legally, if one party to a contract fails to honor his part - the entire contract is voided. So, legally, I don't think you are bound by this
contract. However, if you are holding on to your end of the bargain as a matter of principle - I respect that.

There are some amateurs out there who spend their time trying to keep track of classified military satellites, and they've successfully
been keeping track of the orbits of every classified spy sat out there except for one named "misty,

DANG IT You go to sleep for a few hours and someone comes in here and drops a bomb... all heck breaks loose

Ummm a linky to these 'amateurs' who track these secret space thingies please?

I was going to ask about Misty but seems its already out
there... Thanks for throwing this into the mix

Funny though in all our seeking of secret space craft how this was missed... it really does help to have a name though

That's interesting, do you have any links to misty or maybe a source for the talk about it ?

Quick on the uptake... a good team quality

Originally posted by mikesingh
And if I can't capture them using the 10" LX200R, I'll be sending you the bill for compensation!!

I've spent the last couple of days reading everything about this issue. This is starting to be like a bad Soap Opera. I hope it is not a veiled Ad
Campaign

From what I have seen so far this would appear to be a bunch of poorly executed photos of the Space Station and other Satellites and not much more.
Where the concept of them being some sort of fleet of large Alien Craft came from I can't see. What about these photo's would even lead to that in
the first place. That appears to be a supposition based on an opinion pulled out of thin air and very thin air at that.

Sounds like you have gotten wrapped up in a real messy situation and for now it seems to me you are on the right side of this. Good luck in getting a
satisfactory reply from the other side of this coin. I'd think your only option would be to shelve the film and write it off to a lesson learned. I
think it was in one of your posts I saw it mentioned Celebrities in this field are a bit like "Rock Stars" to deal with.

Unless you have a Confidentiality Agreement written into your original contract there is no reason you can't post the text is there? If you have
covered this forgive these tired old eyes as this was a lot of reading to catch up. The text of the signed contract would clear the air one way or the
other I would think. Instead of claiming what the contents are everyone could see for themselves. Again, if it is posted already and I skimmed over it
please forgive.

Thanks for the web site URL, I received these coordinates from someone and never knew where they came from. Thanks for acknowledging the source.
Let's keep this link active and this person's findings! I hope these coordinates yield results. I have a line on an optical system that my friend
told me Lenard based his apparatus on. I am finding this link and will post it in the morning. I need to go back to bed. I am beat.

Thanks Internos!

Jose Escamilla

I have to get my 10" scope out and start looking at the given location and see what I can come up with.

I'm planning on going out to N.H next week to get in a fair dosage of astronomy. I have high doubts after seeing those coordinates but I'll take out
both of my telescopes, filters, eye pieces, and some possible hoax equipment to see if I can't duplicate what we're being shown.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.